Volume 3, Number 1, January-February, 2013 pp: 01-05 h

http://vfast.org/index.php/VTIR@ 2013

Volume 3, Number 1, January-February, 2013 pp: 01-05

0–-10

THE ISLAMIC POLITY OF ABDUL A‟LA MAWDUDI

Abstract. Abdul A’la Mawdudi is an important exponent and interpreter of Islam.

Mawdudi played important role in the expressions of several themes, which are very

important in revivalist writings of Islam of the twentieth century. Like many

revivalists of Islam, Mawdudi sought to present a programme for resuscitation of

Muslims and for the removal of evils from world. His thought is premised on his

understanding that the modern world with its specific principles and ideologies is the

source of all evils and sufferings. His writings, which he derives from interpretation

of Qur’an and other Islamic sources, are therefore in response to Western ideologies

and provide an alternative to them. He seeks to present a reasoned critique of the

modern world system particularly in its Western form and offers an alternative to it

by presenting Islam as a system. This alternative, in his interpretation existed in the

past in the form of the early Islamic state of the Prophet and the Caliphate.

Therefore, his concern becomes that of reviving this early system of Islam. But, then

his project is not of merely reviving the ideal Islamic past. It also involves

modernisation of Islamic political thought to meet the challenges of the modern

world. His writings reinterpret various Islamic principles so that they can be applied

to modern setting. Driven by the concerns mentioned above, the writings of Sayyid

Abdul Ala Mawdudi seek to provide an understanding of the modern world, its

criticisms and an alternative. So his political thought- expressed in speeches and

writings- present his understanding of modernity (particularly its ideologies), his

understanding of Islam and finally his alternative to modernity, which is an Islamic

system or polity. Mawdudi’s thought is an outcome of interpretation of Islam, which

is consistent with the long tradition of Islamic thought and jurisprudence. This quest

for alternative or revival makes Mawdudi offer a different understanding of Islam as

an ideology and as a polity. In this regard, the paper seeks to map out the various

aspects of Mawdudi’s political thought. It would explore the understanding of the

modern world as reflected in his thought. The paper will present Mawdudi’s

understanding of Islam as an alternative. Finally, the paper would explore

Mawdudi’s process of change or revolution.

Keywords: Abdul A‟la Mawdudi; Qur‟an; Islam; Prophet; Caliphate; Ideology.

1. Introduction. “Islam is a revolutionary ideology and programme, which seeks to alter the social order

of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals. „Muslim is the title of that

International Revolutionary party organized by Islam to carry into effect its revolutionary programme. And

„Jihad refers to that revolutionary struggle and utmost exertion which the Islamic party brings into play to

achieve this objective” {Maududi 2006}.

Abdul Ala Mawdudi was born in Hyderabad in 1903. His parents moved from Delhi to Hyderabad.

Mawdudi had very few years of formal education in madrassa. He was self-taught in Islam. Mawdudi

gained good knowledge of Arabic language at an early age. Mawdudi started his career as a journalist. He

became the editor of the Urdu weekly Taj at the age of seventeen.

A major change came in his life in 1924, when he became the editor of al-Jamaat, the newspaper of

Jamat-e-Ulama. He continued to be the editor of the newspaper till 1927. The position brought him in direct

contact with important leaders of Muslims in the country. The newspaper provided Mawdudi the

opportunity to express himself to the Muslims in country {Adams 1983}. His engagement as an editor

MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN1

School of International Studies Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi, India muza.ladakh@gmail.com

VFAST Transactions on Islamic Researchhttp://vfast.org/journals/index.php/VTIR@ 2014 ISSN(e): 2309-6519;ISSN(p): 2411-6327Volume 2, Number 1, January-December, 2014 pp. 01–-09

1

exposed him to the major political issues related to Muslim during that period. Mawdudi headed several

newspapers and journals after that. In 1932, he became the editor of the famous journal Tarjuman-ul-

Quran. Mawdudi wrote on several political issues related to Muslims in India.

After series of engagement as a scholar and writer, he entered active politics and founded Jamaat-e-Islami

in 1941. The party came in response to the Lahore resolution of August 1940 of Muslim league {Grare

2001}. The resolution argued for the establishment of autonomous states in Muslim majority areas. It was

the beginning of the Muslim nationalism of the league against the Indian nationalism. The political

ideology of Mawdudi got its final shape in the series of writings and lectures, which he delivered during

this period, preceding the partition.

The partition in sub-continent also divided the Jamaat-e-Islami organization into two independent

branches. With partition, Mawdudi moved to Pakistan. Thereafter, Mawdudi‟s political and intellectual

movements were closely tied to the developments that Jamaat experienced.

Mawdudi is an important exponent and interpreter of Islam. Mawdudi played important role in the

expressions of several themes, which are very important in revivalist writings of Islam of the twentieth

century. Like many revivalists of Islam, Mawdudi sought to present a programme for resuscitation of

Muslims and for the removal of evils from world. His thought is premised on his understanding that the

modern world with its specific principles and ideologies is the source of all evils and sufferings. His

writings, which he derives from interpretation of Quran and other Islamic sources, are therefore in response

to Western ideologies and provide an alternative to them. He seeks to present a reasoned critique of the

modern world system particularly in its Western form and offers an alternative to it by presenting Islam as

a system. This alternative, in his interpretation existed in the past in the form of the early Islamic state of

the Prophet and the Caliphate. So his concern becomes that of reviving this early system of Islam. But, then

his project is not of merely reviving the ideal Islamic past. It also involves modernisation of Islamic

political thought to meet the challenges of the modern world. His writings reinterpret various Islamic

principles so that they can be applied to modern setting.

Driven by the concerns mentioned above, the writings of Sayyid Abdul Ala Mawdudi seek to provide

an understanding of the modern world, its criticisms and an alternative. So his political thought- expressed

in speeches and writings- present his understanding of modernity (particularly its ideologies), his

understanding of Islam and finally his alternative to modernity which is an Islamic system or polity.

Mawdudi‟s thought is an outcome of interpretation of Islam, which is consistent with the long tradition of

Islamic thought and jurisprudence. Yet his assimilation of several modern concepts sets him apart from

unaccommodating traditionalists {Moten 1984}.This quest for alternative, or revival makes Mawdudi offer

a different understanding of Islam as an ideology and as a polity.

2. Understanding The Modern World. Mawdudi understands the modern world as an arena of evils. It is an arena marked with presence of

ignorance. It is also an arena, where Muslims lost to Western modernity. For him, understanding the

modern becomes important in order to identify its roots and expose its various forms:

The whole of mankind-Muslims as well as non-Muslims and the people of the East as well as the

West-are today beset with a grave evil: their lives are governed by a culture that was born in crass

materialism and as now totally steeped in it. The practical policies as well as the theory of this culture are

based on perverse and unstable foundations {Maududi 1952}.

Mawdudi identifies all the evils and problems of mankind with the political systems present in the

world and the principles which make them function. He thinks that Western civilisation does not have the

right sense of direction and it is inherently rotten because of the falsity of its foundational principles

{Ahmad and Ansari 2000}.

Mawdudi considers that the three principles of secularism, nationalism and democracy are at the core

of organisation of present-day world. He regards them as “the corner-stone of the way of life evolved in

modern times” and considers them the root cause of all the calamities and troubles of mankind {Maudoodi

2009}. For the sake of better understanding, we shall take a brief look at each of them separately in the

following sections.

2.1. Secularism. Mawdudi considers secularism to have evolved as an independent theory of life and then

become the foundation stone of modern civilization. Mawdudi understands secularism as the first and

“foremost foundation stone” of modern world. Secularism is understood as the confinement of divine

guidance, obedience and worship of God to the personal sphere of individual life and organization of world

affairs in accordance with human wishes and expediency {Maudoodi 2009}.

Secularism as it understands by Mawdudi has two important aspects. Firstly, secularism involves the

rejection of religion as the principal guiding force of modern society and state. Secondly, it involves an

understanding of religion as a private matter of an individual. The first aspect of secularism gives an

individual absolute right to set the goals of his societal life. This understanding is regarded as the starting

point of all the ideologies of the modern world. Mawdudi understands that all the “isms” of the modern

2

world have emerged from the same basic philosophy that, “man rather than God has the right to prescribe

the goal of human life and the norms for human conduct” {Ahmad and Ansari 2000}. For Mawdudi, it is

this departure from God to man, which is the starting point of all the evils of the modern world. So

secularism for him involved a process of abandoning God and deifying the human self to the level of

divinity. This replacement is considered as the beginning of all evils. It is this god (self as God) that has,

“injected the poison of selfishness and self-indulgence and luxurious living into every aspect of social life,

and demeaned the politics of mankind by corrupting it with nationalism, racial discrimination and the

worship of power” {Maududi 1952}. The main reason this replacement has yielded evil, according to him,

is that human nature is selfish and it expresses itself in the absence of divine guidance. So secularism,

which raises the human being above everything else, releases an uncontrolled selfish human being.

“Whenever a man acts independently of the Divine guidance, nothing is left of the permanent and firm

principles of truth and justice. This is because after depriving himself of God‟s guidance no other source is

left to seek guidance from, except man‟s own passions, imperfect knowledge, and experience”{Maudoodi

2009}.This attribute of human nature in absence of any guiding principle is reflected both by society and

higher forms of social organization.

Mawdudi understands secularism as religion-less and a secular society as a religion-less society. The

absence of religion has an implication for the morality of a society. He understands that secularism deprives

society from any kind of morality. This understanding stems from his linkage of morality with religion. It is

not conceivable to expect any kind of morality without religion and sanction of eternal punishment.

Therefore, secularism involves an exclusion of all morality and ethics from the controlling mechanisms of

society {Adams 1983}. In this way, Mawdudi considers the modern world with its politics as a system

devoid of moral and ethical consideration.

Mawdudi completely rejects the second aspect of secularism, which involves confinement of religious

performances to the private domain: “There can be nothing more absurd than that each person should claim

individually to be the servant of God but when these separate individuals collectively form themselves into

society, they should cease to be servants of the Almighty God” {Maudoodi 2009}

Mawdudi is critical not only of various aspects of secularism, as he understands them; he has his

reservation about a secular form of government as well. This reservation seems to have been expressed to

counter the secular rhetoric of the Congress party and the Muslims secularists. For Mawdudi, in a secular

system, the government will be secular only towards the religion of minority groups. The government will

neither help nor restrain the minorities, while it will be a partisan of the religion of majority {Adams 1983}.

In the final conception of his polity, which is an Islamic polity, Mawdudi calls for complete removal of all

traces of secularism, which as a creed led to removal of any influence of God.

2.2. Nationalism. Mawdudi is critical of the way in which nationalism has evolved. As he understands it,

nationalism in the beginning was a movement against universal oppression of the Pope and the Caesar with

the aim of freeing various nationalities from spiritual or political power of universal character and giving

the latter complete say over their own political and other affairs. This evolved to a stage, where nationalism

was “placed on the throne of God who had already been ejected from His position under the impact of

secularism” {Maudoodi 2009}. Mawdudi understands that in the beginning, it was a struggle for national

freedom. He favours the idea of national freedom. He understands that it evolved from here to the current

form of nationalism. He is apprehensive about nationalism in the current form. In the present form,

nationalism came to define the moral standards and values, which Mawdudi was a function of religion in

the past.

Nationalism has two main implications. Firstly, it made national interest and aspiration as the highest

moral standard and value. This view redefines the understanding of virtue and evil. Virtue now consists of

anything advantageous to the nation and evil includes everything, which has negative implication on

national interest. So a virtue can be oppression and faithlessness provided that they serve national interest,

and an evil can be justice, rights, truth and obligations when they are injurious to national interest

{Maudoodi 2009}.

Secondly, it caused the division of humanity into racial and linguistic groups. It has led to the

demarcation of artificial geographical borders. In all these, nationalism have destroyed, the deeper bonds

present among individuals {Grare 2001}. Mawdudi rejects the claims of racial and geographical factors that

seek loyalties from Muslims. These ideas are considered to disturb the unity of mankind and narrow down

the cosmopolitan outlook which Islam encourages in the first place and secondly they are considered to

produce a materialistic outlook on life and territorial and racial consciousness which contradicts the

humanizing spirit of mankind {Moten 1984}. The idea of nationalism is opposed to Mawdudi‟s notion of

Islamic polity, which is marked with a complete absence of nationalism. Nationalism also contradicts the

idea of community in Islamic polity, which is the Umma. Umma is the community of those who have

surrendered to the will of God. It is different from the other mode of defining community on the basis of

race, colour and territory.

3

Mawdudi‟s criticism of nationalism was also informed by the political situation of the Indian

subcontinent in late mid twentieth century. He was critical of all strands of movements of nationalism

present at the time of India‟s struggle for independence—both the separatist nationalism of Muslim league

and the composite nationalism championed by Maulana Azad. His criticism of “composite” nationalist

theory was rooted in his concern about the cultural threat posed by this strand of nationalism, particularly in

the Indian context. He feared that nationalism of this kind would expose Muslims to the grave threats of

religio-cultural absorption into Hinduism {Ahmad 1967}. So far as Muslim separatism or Muslim

nationalism is concerned, Mawdudi considered it to be a mere substitution of Indian nationalism {Adams

1983}. He believed that different nationalities cannot tolerate coexistence with each other and will seek to

annihilate each other. He considered the nationalisms of Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims responsible for the

violence that happened at the time of partition {Grare 2001}.

Mawdudi in his critique of various strands of nationalism sought to create a strong position for his

programme vis-à-vis others. Mawdudi ascribes nationalism the tendency to negate the positive outcomes of

any kind of social movement. In his view, nationalism possesses the potential to destroy the positives,

which were the outcome of the French Revolution and Communism. For this reason, he wanted his state

(Islamic state) to be free from all traces of nationalism. He considered Islam as the complete opposite of

nationalism and everything associated with it. For this reason, he considers the state system of Islam as a

non-national state {Moten 1984}.

2.3. Democracy. Mawdudi‟s engagement with democracy has been a complex one. Democracy finds

multiple meanings in his conception. It is understood differently when he deals with the Western model

than when he presents the specific aspect of his polity, which is also regarded by him as a form of

democracy. This treatment of democracy has to do with the context in which Mawdudi encountered it for

the first time, where democracy was a favourite, particularly with its emancipatory promises in a pluralistic

society {Nasr 1996}. This is the reason that he himself presents the Islamic state as a democratic state.

Though he presents the Islamic polity in contrast to everything that the West stands for, democracy is still

very much assimilated in his conception of the alternate polity of Islam.

He does not reject the principle in totality. He is critical of certain particular aspects of democracy. Just

as secularism and nationalism, Mawdudi appreciates the cause for which the concept came initially. That is,

he applauds it as a concept initially forwarded to loosen the oppressive grip of monarchs over the masses.

He is also not critical of the concept as such. Democracy for him becomes dangerous only in the presence

of other two principles of secularism and nationalism. Mawdudi presents his Islamic polity as opposed to

the secular Western democracy, which has sovereignty of people at its base. He considers that the authority

is exercised in an uncontrolled manner in a democratic system {Moten 1984}. Yet he regularly invokes

democracy to describe the Islamic state that he conceived. Here democracy is something, which is

appreciated. Democracy is treated as a neutral ideal, which can be Islamized without surrendering any

ground to the West {Nasr 1996}.

The context in which Mawdudi was writing again had implications on his take on democracy in both

positive and negative ways. He sought to assimilate the concept to address the attractive appeal of secular

democracy. His criticism of constitutional democracy was informed by his concern about Muslims falling

prey to its lure. Mawdudi rejects the possibility of any presence of any kind of safeguard in a democratic

constitution that can truly protect the minority. Democracy is a kind of government where majority rules

regardless of the concern that whether its views are right or wrong. Democracy thus becomes a tyranny by

majority. This kind of polity represents a great threat to the culture, identity and religion of the minority

{Adams 1983}. So in the Indian context, Mawdudi presented democracy as posing a threat to the Muslims.

3. The Alternate Polity.

In presenting his alternative, Mawdudi first explains his understanding of Islam. Then he derives principles

of the Islamic system from this understanding. Further, he discusses the importance of Shari‟a as a guide of

Islamic polity, and finally he briefly maps out an institutional scheme of his perceived Islamic state.

3.1. Understanding Of Islam.

Mawdudi believes that if the modern world is not offered with alternative principles and vision, then it will

slide into a frightful dark age. This makes it important for him to present the alternative Islamic way of life.

His vision here is that of an Islamic reconstruction of human life and establishment of a new social order

and state {Ahmad and Ansari 2000}.

Mawdudi believed that Islam as an alternative will correct modernity of its evils. Mawdudi presents Islam

as the panacea for all the problems of humanity as a whole:

They should be informed that Islam offers… to mankind sublime and stable rules of law and morality

which are based upon a comprehensive knowledge of human nature and cannot be distorted in the pursuit

of selfish ends. It offers salutary principles of culture and civilization, which override the unnatural

distinction of class and the artificial ethnic division and seek to organize mankind on purely rational

4

foundations. Moreover, these principles help to bring about a sound and peaceful atmosphere of justice,

equality, generosity and fair mutual dealings {Maududi 1952}.

Islam forms the core of Mawlana Mawdudi‟s worldview. Islam is understood not as a religion, but as a

complete comprehensive way of life embracing all spheres of human thought and action. Mawdudi presents

Islam as a “well ordered system, a consistent whole” with answers to all problems {Moten 1984}.The quest

is to present Islam as a coherent system, with all its principles as the logical outcome of the basic principle

of Tawhid1. The way he presented Islam is a departure from the view of Islam just as a faith. Islam is

presented as a concrete socio-political system so that it can influence the behaviour of individuals as well as

the community to produce social action. For this purpose, Mawdudi felt the need to replace the amorphous

idea of faith with an ideology, so that it can produce tangible relations of authority and provide a concrete

definition of community and political action {Nasr 1996}. In a way, his understanding of faith as such was

motivated by the desire to see political action. Mawdudi believed that true Islamic faith must produce social

actions and attitude. It should aim for both personal righteousness and for creation of an Islamic society

{Adams 1983}. The traditional reading of Islam as a faith was informing the personal righteousness. So the

key concern for Mawdudi was to provide an interpretation that will facilitate political action, attitude and

the creation of an Islamic society. For this purpose, Mawdudi defined Islam both as an ideology and a

movement that seeks to build the structure of human society based on the conception of divine sovereignty

{Mawdoodi 2000}.

Mawdudi‟s reading of Islam is driven by this need for the faith to pose as an ideology. His project of

Islamic revivalism is thus a project of reinterpretation and systematization of Islam so that it can pose as an

ideology and a political system can be derived from it. So there was modernization of Islamic thought and

practice by him, which was disguised by the religious underpinnings. Mawdudi seeks to develop a

comprehensive theory of social sciences from Islam, but with a modern tone. This is evident that he

constantly uses jargons of modern social science and its terminology in presenting his views.

The modernization of Islamic thought is a requirement for Mawdudi to change the existing system

.The need for modernization stems from his understanding of history, and change in it. Azgar Ali Engineer

in this regard interprets that Mawdudi sought to replace class conflict with religious conflict as a mover of

history {Ali 1980}. However, perhaps it is more appropriate to consider that Mawdudi was looking at it in

terms of ideological conflict with Western ideologies and not religion per se. This is evident from his

approach, where he presents Islam as an alternative to the various ideologies of the modern world. Here all

the ideologies of the modern world are un-Islam. Therefore, Mawdudi viewed the modern world as an

arena of conflict between Islam and un-Islam and in doing so; he equated un-Islam with pre-Islamic

ignorance (Jahiliya) and polytheism {Arjomand 1989}. This understanding of modern world and the way it

can be changed informs the way in which he interprets Islam to produce a comprehensive ideology. Grare

interprets that his ideology is the outcome of a dialectical conception of History, which conceives Islam in

a perpetual state of conflict with un-Islam, which must culminate in an Islamic revolution and in the

creation of an Islamic state {Grare 2001}. The modernization of Islamic political thought and the

reinterpretation of Islam become important, as Mawdudi believed that Islam, which is in state of conflict

with Western modernity, is just a shadow of its original form.

Mawdudi emphasizes on the absence of true Islamic spirit. This spirit is identified with three core

principles. The fulfilment of these principles makes the Islamic system a real and a complete system.

Mawdudi recommends them as an alternative to the three core principles or concept of modernity. These

three principles of Islamic system are; the recognition of sovereignty of God, the recognition of man as a

vicegerent of God; and the understanding of the Islamic system as an ideological system.

3.2. Sovereignty Of The God. The starting point or the foundational principle of Islam as understood by

Mawdudi is the acceptance of God as the sovereign of the entire universe. This is understood as the

acceptance of God as master in all realms of life. His exposition on God is based on the distinction between

the metaphysical and worldly political life. For being Muslim one requires to worship God not just in the

metaphysical realm but also in political realm, which means that he must be regarded as master of both

{Ahmad 2009}. This notion of worshipping God in both public and private is contradicted by the

separation brought by secularism, which confines worship to the private realm. The acceptance of God in

public and political realm means acceptance of God as the final legal and constitutional authority. This

acceptance of God as the final authority becomes the starting point of Mawdudi‟s exposition of Islam. He

regards it as the basic principle of Islamic system:

The basic principle of Islamic politics is that, both individually and collectively, human beings should

waive all rights of legislation and all power to give commands….No one is entitled to make laws on his

1 . Mawdudi (2000) regards Tawhid as the starting point of reform. Tawhid as a concept holds God as

the sole creator, sustainer and Master of the universe. It also holds God as the sole sovereign of entire universe.

5

own and none is obliged to abide by them. The right vests in Allah alone:- “The decision rests with Allah

only, who hath commanded that ye worship none save Him. This is the right faith” {Maududi 2003}.

Mawdudi makes it a point to compare his concepts with what he regards as the real Islam as Prophet

presented it. Mawdudi considers his conception of God as the original concept, as it was presented by all

the prophets and messengers of God {Ahmad and Ansari 2000}. This understanding of faith implies a

complete submission to God in both private and public. Now the right faith makes it important for people to

mould their personal life as well as collective social life in accordance with Islam. Mawdudi believed that

the real purpose behind the mission of Prophet Muhammad was to bring people to complete submission to

God. That is the recognition of God as their Rab (Sustainer and Nourisher) and Illah (Master and

Lawgiver). This for Mawdudi means a complete submission to God in every aspect of life.

3.3. Ideological System. The concept of ideological system is the alternative that Mawdudi offers against

nationalism. The presentation of Islamic system as an ideological system expands its scope beyond the

nation state:

Instead of national system, it should be an ideological system based on certain fixed principles and

stable values….Under such a system citizenship should not be confined within geographical boundaries of

a state but should be common and based on ideological foundations {Maudoodi 2003}.

This ideological expression gives Muslims an identity distinct from other forms of identification. Mawdudi

seeks to argue of an identity in a universal perspective and not in terms of nations, or classes. He believes

that Muslims living in various parts of the world share a single and identifiable religious and cultural

personality. They share same ethical standards, values, beliefs and a common way of life {Ahmad1967}.

3.4. Vicegerncy (Khilafat). The concept of vicegerency or Khilafat, holds human beings as representatives

of God on earth. This view is considered to regulate human beings to produce responsible behaviour. “The

concept of vicegerency and trusteeship creates a particular conduct marked by honesty truthfulness, and

responsibility” {Maududi 2004}. In conceiving the concept of vicegerency, Mawdudi understands an

exalted position of man in the universal scheme:

As viceroy of God, man enjoys a higher status and is superior to all other creations of God. The whole

universe and all things in it are created for man, to be at his service. ….As a viceroy man is supposed to be

obedient and loyal to God and his basic duty is to enforce His guidance on his own self, and call others to

enter the circle of God‟s obedience {Maududi 2004}.

For Mawdudi, man has been entrusted with the great, yet difficult office of vicegerency of God on this

planet. This puts the responsibility on humans to mould their society in accordance with the immutable and

everlasting law of revelation {Ahmad 1967}. Mawdudi considers the Islamic conception of man and his

relationship with the universe as the only natural one. This is deduced from the relation that just like the

universe, in Islam man follows natural law, which signifies complete submission to Allah {Mawdudi

1952}.

3.5. Shari’a: The Guide. Shari‟a (the Islamic law) is regarded as the codification of law of God and thus

guide for human life. Shari‟a is understood by Mawdudi as the scheme of life (both individual and social)

as it is prescribed in the Quran and in the Sunna of Prophet {Moten 1984}. In this understanding, Shari‟a

provides guidance not only for the mode of worship for individuals, but also directives for collective social

life. It prescribes mode of behaviour for all aspects of life, which includes both social and political. Shari‟a

is a body of edicts and religious laws pronounced by the theologians, prescribing the scheme of life and

which are derived from the Quran and the Sunna2. The observation of Shari‟a means making life Islamic.

Shari‟a is regarded as the solution of all problems of human social life:

Mawdudi has an organic understanding of Shari‟a, whereby all its provisions are organically derived

from the basic principle of sovereignty of God. This is consistent with the cardinal principle of the political

thought of Mawdudi. His thought starts from the premises that the principal derivative source of law is the

Quran and the ultimate legal authority vests alone in God {Ahmad 1967}. The organic nature of Shari‟a

implies that it should be implemented in its entirety to guide both individual piety and social action.

Mawdudi believed that Muslims moved away from following a complete Shari‟a since the time of the

rightly guided Caliphs3 {Adams 1983}. This is part of the degeneration, which Muslims went through over

a period. The complete observation of Shari‟a as source of law of God is the most important correction that

should be done to remove evils from the world.

2 There has been no single meaning of Sharia in the long tradition of Islamic theology. The meaning

of Sharia varied based on context. It includes writings of juridical rules, instructions and also writings of ethics. For more on the this aspect of the concept see, Alam, M. (2000). Sharia and governance in the Indo-Islamic context. In Beyond turk and hindu: rethinking religious identities in islamicate-south asia (pp. 216-245). 3The first four Caliphs of Muslims are considered to be rightly guided and pious Caliph.

6

Observation of Shari‟a is important for both binding and defining the characteristics of Islamic society.

“Islamic society is an ideological society, bound by a contract of absolute submission (Islam) to the divine

injunctions. Shari‟a, in this context is the legal codification of this contract” {Ahmad 1967}. Shari‟a

defines the characteristics of Islamic state as well as the society. The basic characteristic of an Islamic

society is that its entire structure is based on the concept of sovereignty of God. So in his understanding,

law should determine the social structure rather than social structure determining the laws {Engineer

1980}. Similarly the attributes of state are determined by Islamic law (Shari‟a) based on complete

submission to God.

Mawdudi is very strict in terms of his identification of sources of Islamic law. Mawdudi restricts the

derivation of Islamic law to two key sources; the Quran and the Sunna4 {Maududi 2004}. Mawdudi seems

to expand the ambit of Shari‟a by its reinterpretation of what was originally laid down by ulema in the early

Islamic period. This is done to meet the complexities of the modern world system. Engineer observes that

Mawdudi considered reinterpretation or adjustment with Islamic laws equal to unpardonable heresy and

which deserves outright condemnation. This is coherent with his understanding that Islam must be accepted

in its entirety along with its concepts, which were formulated by ulema of the early Islamic period

{Engineer 1980}. However, it seems that Mawdudi recognises the shortcomings of Islamic law. The

Islamic law was incomplete for Mawdudi and was not fit to offer guidance for collective social life in the

modern system. Mawdudi accepted the shortcomings of Islamic law in dealing with the challenges of

modern times which pose the problem of dealing with the constitutional, international and criminal legal

spheres as separate disciplines {Ahmad 1967}.“These problems can be solved only through the

interpretation of the principle of Islamic theology and law in the light of the changed conditions (ijtihad),

but our ulema seem to shun any such endeavour” {Maududi 1952}.

3.6. Islamic State. The conception of an Islamic state is vital to the entire project of revivalism by

Mawdudi. It is impossible to have Islamic revival without an Islamic state. This importance, which

Mawdudi ascribes to Islamic state in his larger scheme of revivalism, is the most novel feature of his

ideology {Arjomand 1989}. The need of an Islamic state comes from the very nature of universal order.

That is, the Islamic state for Mawdudi is a part of broad integrated theology of Islam, whose cardinal

principle is the sovereignty of God {Adams 1983}. Irfan Ahmed in this regard considers the notion of an

Islamic state as an invention by Mawdudi. He further argues that Mawdudi subscribed to the idea of

Islamic state not because it was intrinsic to Islam, but because of the extraordinary capacity and reach of

modern state to influence the collective life of individuals in a society. In fact, the unprecedented

penetration of the state in the lives of individuals made it imperative to control the state as an institution to

bring any change in society {Ahmad 2009}. Mawdudi understood the importance of governmental power

both for the removal of existing system and establishment of the new one. Here it becomes essential for

Muslims to take the authority of the state under their control:

Hence, this party is left with no other choice except to capture State Authority, for an evil system takes

root and flourish under the patronage of an evil government and a pious cultural order can never be

established until the authority of Government is wrested from the wicked and transferred into the hands of

the reformers {Maududi 2006}.

Therefore, in this understanding, there is no meaning of Islam as a movement without political power.

Islam as a comprehensive ideology requires state power to enforce itself. Mawdudi understood that by its

nature, Islam is bound to replace other systems and for this, it requires to have control over state power

{Engineer 1980}.

The plan of Islamic state is a manifestation of all the principles of Islamic system; sovereignty of God,

ideological system and vicegerency. Based on these principles, the Islamic state as conceived by Mawdudi

is an ideological state, a non-national state and acts as vicegerent of God on earth. There are two attribute

of Islamic state. The first one is that of vicegerency where both the state as well as individuals are regarded

as vicegerents of God. The state as a vicegerent assumes a key objective of evolving and developing a well

balanced system of social justice which has been set forth by God in Quran {Mawdudi 2003}. Here the

concept of vicegerency ensures equality and absence of any kind of dictatorship; both the leader as well as

ordinary people are vicegerent (Caliphs) and the leader will be responsible both to the people and to God

{Maududi 2003}. Vicegerency or Caliphate bestows right as well as power to the individual who further

delegates it to the leader. This concept is regarded by Mawdudi as the most ideal form of democracy in

practice:

Every person in an Islamic society enjoys the rights and powers of the Caliphate of the God and in this

respect all individuals are equal…The agency for running the affairs of the state will be formed with the

will of these individuals, and the authority of the state will only be an extension of the powers of

4Sunnah is the collection of sayings and practices of the Prophet.

7

individuals delegated to it…In this respect the political system of Islam is a perfect form of democracy-as

perfect as democracy can ever be {Maududi 2010}.

Mawdudi regards this form of democracy as different from the Western one. He uses the term theo-

democracy or theocratic democracy to describe the form of government in an Islamic state, which is based

on the concept of vicegerency {Grare 2001}.

The second attribute is of state is its ideological nature. As an ideological state, Islam does not

recognize any kind of ethnicity or race in defining citizenry. That is in an Islamic state the members are

together by their belief. The state is open to those, who embrace the sovereignty of God {Maududi 2003}.

The members of this state are supposed to understand their responsibilities to God and to the community

{Moten 1984}. As an ideological state , the state will be run exclusively by Muslims and there and two

kinds of citizens, Muslims and non-Muslims ,with the former taking part in administration of government

and the latter having the guarantee of protection of life and property {Adams 1983}.

4.The Process Of Change: ‘Islamic Revolution’. Mawdudi presents his understanding of revolution as

different from the Western sense of the term5. This engagement is driven by the need to counter the very

appeal of revolution, which was attracting the masses. In doing so, Mawdudi regularly invokes Western

concepts. Mawdudi uses idioms of revolution to create a progressive image of Islam in battle with the

leftists for the adherence of Muslims {Nasr 1996}. Arjomand in this regard comments that, “In Mawdudi‟s

writing, there is a marriage of Islamic revivalism and revolutionary ideology, and the appropriation of the

modern myth of revolution” {Arjomand 1989}. So an engagement with the concept involved both

invocation of modern aspects of revolution and the presenting of Islamic revolution as a different one at the

same time.

Islamic revolution is the process of changing the mentality of the masses and the collective life of

humanity {Mawdudi 2000}. It is understood as a process of comprehensive change in the whole system,

which involves in the first place changing the man himself in terms of his outlook, motivation and

personality {Moten 1984}. Mawdudi considers Islamic revolution as a „complete revolution‟. In his

understanding, a complete revolution is one, which takes place at two levels―internal (individual) and

external (societal). Mawdudi considers Islamic revolution as a complete one and different from modern

revolutions, as it seeks change at both levels {Ahmad and Ansari 2000}. Although Mawdudi considered

the independence movement of 1947 as a revolution evidenced by his use of the word inquilab (revolution)

to describe it, he regarded it a revolution in only external circumstances, without any inward and essential

changes that Islam sought {Adams 1983}.

His process of revolution, unlike the Marxist notion, does not seek any major change in the economic

realm. To the contrary, in his mind, revolution involves gradual social, cultural and political changes with

an objective understood in ethical terms and not socio-economic terms {Nasr 1996}. This is the reason that

the very process of bringing revolution gives emphasis on education as an instrument of change.

5.How To Bring Revolution?. Mawdudi considers the example of Prophet Muhammad or the way he

spread the message of Islam and established Medina as the path of revolution. The Prophet, according to

Mawdudi, undertook; firstly, education of masses to inculcate beliefs in fundamentals of Islam, secondly,

organization of masses under one platform and encouraging them to practice Islam and finally, presented a

shining example of Islamic state which attracted everyone to the call of Islam {Moten 1984}.

The process of Islamic movement involves two simultaneous processes of education and undergoing

struggle. Education becomes important to mould the character of masses in accordance with Islam.

Education is also an instrument of harmonization in society. This harmonization reduces the scope for use

of force in the revolutionary process {Nasr 1996}. Education fitted in Mawdudi‟s scheme of an

evolutionary approach to revolution. He insisted on an evolutionary approach to revolution, and in doing

so, opposed any kind of involvement of force and radicalism {Moten 1984}. In the process of revolutionary

struggle, force becomes irrelevant since the struggle is basically aimed at an ideational change by the

Muslims understood as a revolutionary party. In Mawdudi‟s words, such a party, “does not attack the home

of the opposing party, but launches an assault on the principles of the opponent” {Mawdudi 2006}.

The process of undergoing a struggle is a pacifist one, which involves suffering by those who lead

movements because of the harsh resistance they face in the existing system. This is part of the strategy, as

Mawdudi believed that their display of personal sacrifices and sufferings and the absence of any selfish

motives would attract others to the movement {Mawdudi 2000}. The idea of attraction or seduction seems

5. Mawdudi (2006) makes a distinction of not only revolution, but also of revolutionaries. Mawdudi

regards revolutionaries of the world to be speaking for just one class or as section, thus producing a bias in their viewpoint in favour of one group or class thus producing hatred for other. Revolution by such group, as he regards will prescribe a remedy for tyranny, which will itself be tyrannical and revengeful.

8

to be the main way through which Mawdudi expected the movement to proceed. Drawing from the

experience of Prophet Muhammad, Mawdudi believed that once the Islamic state comes into existence it

will seduce the whole of humanity {Maududi 2000}.

The scope of Islamic revolution does not end with any single state. This is mainly due to the nature of

the ideology itself. Mawdudi regards that since the ideology champions the welfare of entire humanity, it

cannot restrict its limit to a single country or a nation {Maududi 2006}. Therefore, the ultimate goal of the

entire project of Islamic revival is to realize a universal revolution {Moten 1984}. So the Islamic state

which comes into existence as a result of Islamic revolution is regarded as both the starting point and the

harbinger of an entire process of universal revolution {Nasr 1996}.

6. Conclusion. Mawdudi understand modern world as an arena of evil and grievances. The problem with

modernity has been identified with its three foundational principles― secularism, nationalism and

democracy. Secularism is further blamed to be at the very core of disorder, which is prevalent in modern

world. It has been regarded to have caused the domination of impulse of „selfishness‟. This impulse is then

reflected in higher forms of social organization. Nationalism has been identifies as the second principle,

which embodies the impulse of selfishness present in a nation or „national selfishness‟. It further created a

new system of morality in modern political system, with the „benefit‟ of nation as its key marker. The third

principle, democracy, which though commands some respect in the thoughts of Mawdudi, is corrupted in

the influence of nationalism and secularism. Mawdudi prescribes Islamic polity as the solution to the evils

present in modern world. This Islamic polity is based on the recognition of „sovereignty of God‟. God as

the Sovereign is accepted as the source of law. Islamic polity is based on the recognition of Sovereignty of

God and complete observation of entire Shari‟a. The state in its final form is considered to be a „theocratic-

democracy‟. Mawdudi identifies masses as the vicegerent, and in doing so makes them the medium through

which authority from God is transferred to the ruler. Finally, the most interesting aspect of Mawdudi‟s

thought is his scheme of change. Here his „Islamic revolution‟, which he considers as a complete change is

based on a process of education. The revolution is expected to spread with the ability of the vanguard to

attract others.

REFERENCES

[1]. Maududi, S.A.A. (2006). Jihad in islam. The Holy Koran Publishing House.

[2]. Adams, Charles J. (1983). Mawdudi and the islamic state. In Voices of resurgent islam Oxford

University Press (pp. 99-133).

[3]. Alam, M. (2000). Sharia and governance in the indo-islamic context. In Beyond turk and hindu:

rethinking religious identities in islamicate-south asia University Press of Florida (pp. 216-245).

[4]. Grare, Fredric. (2001). Political islam in the indian sub continent: The Jamaat-i-islami, Manohar

Publishers.

[5]. Moten, A. Rashid. (1984). Pure and practical ideology: The thought of mawlana mawdudi The

Islamic Quarterly, 28(4), 217-240.

[6]. Mawdudi, S.A.A. (1952). The sick nations of modern age. Translated by Khurshid Ahmad, Markazi

Maktaba Islami.

[7]. Ahmad, K., & Ansar, Z.I. (2000). Maulana maududi: An introduction to his life and thought.

Markazi Maktaba Islami.

[8]. Mawdudi, S.A.A. (2009). Our message. Markazi Maktaba Islami.

[9]. Ahmad, Aziz (1967). Mawdudi and the orthodox fundamentalism in pakistan, Middle East, 12(2),

369-379.

[10]. Nasr, Sayed Vali Reza. (1996). Mawdudi and the making of islamic revivalism.Oxford University

Press.

[11]. Mawdudi, S.A.A. (2000). Process of islamic revolution. Markazi Maktaba Islami.

[12]. Engineer, Azghar Ali. (1980). The islamic state. Vikas Publications.

[13]. Arjomand, S.A. (1989). The emergence of islamic political ideologies. In The changing face of

religion. Sage Publications.

[14]. Ahmad, Irfan (2009). Genealogy of the islamic state: Reflections on mawdudi‟s political thought and

islamism. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.), 145-162.

[15]. Mawdudi, S.A.A. (2003), Political theory of islam. Markazi Maktaba Islami.

[16]. Ahmad, Aziz (1967). Islam, modernism in india and pakistan 1857-1964. Oxford University Press.

[17]. Mawdudi, S.A.A. (2004). Understanding islamic civilization. Translated by Muhammad Khalid

Farooqi. Markazi Maktaba Islami.

[18]. Mawdudi, S.A.A. (2010). The message of islam, Markazi Maktaba Islami.

9